HS Interference Play

[AtlUmpSteve]

My opinion; at all but NCAA rules, that should be judged interference. For NCAA, there must be physical contact.

The key to your judgment, IMO, is that you determined the reason F6 hesitated, then went around, was to avoid a collision. That is "hindered" or "impeded" when she has the right of way to get the ball. If F6 routinely played back, let the ball play her, then R1 can advance in front; but she still does so at the possible risk of committing interference.

What is clear to me in many of these similar plays is that R1 is attempting to hinder in anyway possible short of contact, believing that no contact means no interference. Simply not true. It isn't necessary (nor appropriate) to require a collision in a sport where collisions are to be avoided.

[outathm]

Steve:

I would check the rule again, physical contact is not a requirement.

[RKBUmp]

NCAA rules say basically the same thing, "denies the fielder a reasonable opportunity to play the ball"

[Andy]

Although the wording in NCAA rules is basically the same, the common interpretation and teaching at that level is that there should be contact prior to an interference call.

I will say that had this been a college game, I would not have called interference on this play.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by outathm

Steve:

I would check the rule again, physical contact is not a requirement.

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

NCAA rules say basically the same thing, "denies the fielder a reasonable opportunity to play the ball"

NCAA 12.19.1 The base runner may not interfere with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball. For example:

NCAA 12.19.1.4 Physical contact by the base runner with a fielder attempting to field a batted ball shall be interference, provided the fielder had a reasonable chance to make a play and was prevented from doing so.

Which NCAA rule are you citing which defines interference by a base runner without physical contact? Not the general definition (1.72); this specific rule will be and has been cited as requiring physical contact, and I can find no other rule that says (as ASA and NFHS do) that contact is NOT required.

And have been instructed that is the way the NCAA intends the rule to be interpreted, absent some specific act like waving arms or verbal interference (12.19.1.4.2.

[RKBUmp]

I understand that is the stance NCAA is taking that physical contact is required in order to be interference, and if that is the how they want it called, that is fine. However, I do not see where in the rules that is supported.

Yes, I was quoting the general definition of interference in 1.72, but the same wording is used in 12.19. As for 12.19.1.4 it says physical contact "shall" be considered interference, not that it is required. Again, I fully understand NCAA umpires are being instructed to require the physical contact for it to be called. But, if that is the case, then the rule book needs to be reworded to indicate so.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

I work NCAA and had contact on a play last week and the offensive coach still didn't like the call. He said he didn't think the SS would get to the ball. I was certain she would have fielded it. My judgment. We're done.